Armandovieira

Can Machines Become Conscious? Why Not Understanding Consciousness Doesn’t Mean We Can’t Build It We don’t really understand consciousness . Neuroscience can describe which circuits light up when we see red or feel fear, but it can’t explain why there’s something it’s like to be us. Philosophers call this “ the hard problem .” But ignorance hasn’t stopped us before. We built airplanes before we understood turbulence, and neural networks before we understood brains. So perhaps consciousness isn’t something to explain first — it’s something that might emerge when the right computational conditions are in place. Consciousness as Coherence One compelling view, explored by thinkers like Joscha Bach , is that consciousness is not a mysterious substance but a process of coherence : the continuous effort of a mind to keep its many internal models in agreement. Our brains juggle perception, memory, emotion, and prediction. These systems often conflict. Consciousness, in this vi...

We live in a world that worships freedom — freedom of expression, identity, choice, and truth. But beneath the banners of liberation, something stranger is happening: the very pursuit of freedom has birthed new systems of control, conformity, and surveillance . John Milton saw this long before us. In Paradise Lost (1667), he wrote not just about angels and demons, but about the human condition under freedom — the way rebellion can become its own religion, and the way the search for knowledge can turn into self-destruction. Today’s young generation embodies that paradox: defiant yet dependent, liberated yet constantly watched. We are the heirs of both Satan’s rebellion and Eve’s awakening — brilliant, restless, and entangled in our own networks of control. The Rebellion Illusion Satan’s defiance of Heaven begins as idealism — the refusal to kneel, the yearning for autonomy. But Milton shows how quickly rebellion becomes hierarchy, purity, and obsession. Sound familiar? Modern cult...

  Cold, Grey, and Perfect: Why I Love Miserable Estonia Life in Estonia is not for the faint of heart. The winters feel endless, a stretch of frozen silence where the sun barely bothers to rise. The wind from the Baltic slices through coats like it has a personal grudge. The streets in February look like black-and-white photographs: ice, bare branches, tired faces waiting for a bus that may or may not arrive on time. And yet—I love it. There’s a certain honesty in Estonia’s misery. The cold doesn’t pretend to be anything other than cold. The grey skies don’t apologize. Here, life strips itself down to the essentials: you, your resilience, and maybe a cup of scalding hot kohv to remind you that warmth still exists. The silence of an Estonian forest in January is deeper than any meditation retreat. The quiet streets, the reserved people, the absence of endless noise and false cheer—it all feels strangely liberating. Estonia teaches you to endure. It teaches you that comfort is overra...

  Emad Mostaque—founder of Stability AI and now working on “Intelligent Internet” and related projects—has been pushing a provocative thesis: that artificial intelligence isn’t just going to change jobs, but to render the traditional labor-capital relationship obsolete. He argues that we’re approaching a new economic era, one where value is decoupled from human work in ways that force us to rethink what capitalism means, what purpose work serves, and how society might reorganize. Below are his key ideas, implications, and potential pitfalls. What He Argues 1. Labor Irrelevance: Humans No Longer at the Center Mostaque’s core claim: the marginal productivity of human labor is collapsing. AI can write, code, design, analyze, trade. Humans often slow things down, introduce bias, or simply cost too much. In some fields, labor may even become negatively valued —a liability, not an asset. 💬 “The moment machines out-competed humans, labor stopped being the foundation of value...

Question 1: Your partner suggests a "date night optimization algorithm." What do they mean? A) A fancy spreadsheet of romantic ideas. B) A neural net that predicts the best restaurant based on Yelp reviews. C) Literally just asking, "Wanna get tacos?" D) They’re breaking up with you via code.   Question 2: During a movie, they whisper, "This plot is   overfitting   to clichés." You respond: A) "Shh, I’m trying to   train   my attention span!" B) "You’re right—let’s   regularize   with a documentary." C) "Is this a metaphor for our relationship?" D) "…Are you even human?"   Question 3: They call you their "loss function." Is this romantic? A) Yes, because they’re saying you   minimize their sadness . B) No, because it implies you’re   mathematically painful . C) Only if they also call you their   gradient booster . D) Wait, is this about weight loss? Rude.   Question 4: For your anniversary, they propose: A)...

for all those that are in denial about the ability to LLMs to reason, go through these points and check: Determining whether someone truly understands what they're saying—whether it's a human or an AI like me—requires evaluating **depth, consistency, and contextual awareness**. Here’s how to assess understanding: 1. Depth of Explanation  - Sign of Understanding: Ability to rephrase, elaborate, or provide examples in different ways.   - Red Flag: Parroting jargon without simplification or concrete applications.   - Example:   - ✅ Photosynthesis converts sunlight to energy—like a solar panel for plants.   - ❌ Photosynthesis is a metabolic process involving chlorophyll. 2. Logical Consistency  - Sign of Understanding: Arguments hold up under scrutiny; no contradictions.   - Red Flag: Incoherent or shifting claims when questioned.  3. Contextual Adaptation  - Sign of Understanding: Adjusts explanations for the audience (e...